jupsto's forum posts

Avatar image for jupsto
jupsto

54

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

1

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#1  Edited By jupsto
Member since 2005 • 54 Posts

I played and enjoyed BC2, then BF3

Then I tried Project Reality mod for BF2...

So I'm not nostalgia biased in the slightest, when I vote for PR mod. although to be fair the gameplay is so different it doesn't really belong in the series, its practically a different genre of game.

Avatar image for jupsto
jupsto

54

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

1

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#2 jupsto
Member since 2005 • 54 Posts

This is exactly what I think of this situation

Loading Video...

Avatar image for jupsto
jupsto

54

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

1

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#3  Edited By jupsto
Member since 2005 • 54 Posts

I adore bethesda's games but I feel like they are going to get stale very quickly.

Ive done so much quests in FO3, NV, TES4, TES5 that its starting to feel quite contrived.

And the combat in bethesda games is always a huge gaping weakpoint.

I really hope for FO4 and TES6 they take some risks, and try and push difficulty/realism/grit in there as well as game systems that feel new. FO4 should definitely feel like a real shooter. and TES could do with some mount & blade ques.

overall I vote TES

Avatar image for jupsto
jupsto

54

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

1

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#4  Edited By jupsto
Member since 2005 • 54 Posts

modern warfare 2

There was alot of legit reasons PC gamers tried to boycott this game. cod4 was actually a good PC game, the series has just got drastically worse and worse and worse.

just show how lucrative appealing to a lowest common denominator is.

age of empires online.

I never actually played it, but I didn't need to know it would break my heart.

Avatar image for jupsto
jupsto

54

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

1

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#5 jupsto
Member since 2005 • 54 Posts

they are all pretty pointless lets face it.

i used to use xfire. now I just use steam but only when I play games through steam and but so does everyone else so why not just add them on there, I don't need 2 different versions of instant messaging.

Avatar image for jupsto
jupsto

54

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

1

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#6 jupsto
Member since 2005 • 54 Posts

I was actually much of a fan of bf2 when I bought like a year or two ago. but if its like bc2 but with 64 players and bigger maps then sign me up. seriously though how different can it be to bc2? dont mention singleplayer, I didn't bother with that on either of these games. they both set in same time period I presume and using the same engine and are the same type of game. so whats the point?

I realize I'm going to get flamed for this, but...

Does anyone else actually prefer BC2's "consolized" (read: smaller and more focused) presentation over that of the regular Battlefield series? I was really into Battlefield 2 when it was first released, and although it's a great game, I honestly felt like the scope of the game just hampered its enjoyability much of the time. Huge maps are all well and good, but not when you constantly end up stranded half a mile from the battle because your idiot teammates each took off in their own vehicle and sped off without you, ignoring your requests for a ride. This was a problem even in servers at half capacity with only 32 players, as was the mass overpopulation of snipers, which was another problem exacerbated by the huge maps. And the squad system didn't help much either, as most squad leaders didn't seem to even understand the concept.

In sum: When it comes to multiplayer, I'll take a smaller, more focused game that gets everything right and gives players less opportunity to create headaches, rather than a wide-open, experimental cluster-(censored) where huge numbers of morons can run rampant, any day of the week.

JN_Fenrir

while I kind of agree. I dont think it was smaller maps and less player which fixed those bf2 problems in bc2, they rebalanced and redid things such as the squad system, hopefully these new features will stay. but again I dont get why these two games need to be titled as different series, unless its some pointless singleplayer thing.

Avatar image for jupsto
jupsto

54

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

1

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#7 jupsto
Member since 2005 • 54 Posts

gt4 is the worst port ever made. its also a very overated drab game. I dont know why I wasted £30-40 on that ****. I'm generally against pirating, but no way am I buying a PC game off rockstar again. this is probably why they didn't release red dead on PC.

Avatar image for jupsto
jupsto

54

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

1

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#8 jupsto
Member since 2005 • 54 Posts

sometimes steam have really good deals but 90% of the time I can buy new BOXED versions CHEAPER they arrive in 3-5 days from sites like play.com or amazon. only time I bought something of steam was a game I already had for the DLC packs (oblivion and it wasn't worth it).

Avatar image for jupsto
jupsto

54

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

1

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#9 jupsto
Member since 2005 • 54 Posts

been raging on this on other forum but wanted to come here and express my uttermost rage as well. so glad I heard saved me £35, was super hyped and nearly bought this game but now IW (who I used to like) can **** right off.

oh and I think cod4 didn't have mods because they didn't release SDK or modding tools like valve/bethesda do. altho there is a paintball mod, and a pretty sweet xmas version of one of the maps.

but no dedicated servers + obligatory matchmaking just makes it like some **** console game.

BOOOYCOTT

Avatar image for jupsto
jupsto

54

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

1

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#10 jupsto
Member since 2005 • 54 Posts
Heard about this before. I am right in thinking it only uses your CPU when your not, so wont ever low down my games, right? well the link to XP download isn't working :(